Edition

South Korea Tells China Not to Intervene in Missile-Defense System Talks

IN THIS ISSUE: South Korea Tells China Not to Intervene in Missile-Defense System Talks, THAAD Deployment in ROK to "Directly" Impair China's Security Interests: FM, U.S., China Agree on Draft North Korea Sanctions Resolution at U.N.: Envoys, Russia Wants Closer Look From Above the U.S., Kendall: DoD to Decide Fate of Major Satellite Programs Within Months, Nuclear Liability Concern Lingers Despite India Signing Treaty

Published on February 25, 2016

South Korea Tells China Not to Intervene in Missile-Defense System Talks

Choe Sang-Hun | New York Times

Tensions between South Korea and China over how to deal with the North have flared into an unusually blunt diplomatic dispute, with Seoul telling Beijing on Wednesday not to meddle in its talks with the United States over the possible deployment of an American missile-defense system here. Jung Youn-kuk, a spokesman for President Park Geun-hye of South Korea, said Seoul’s decision to discuss the system, known as Thaad, which stands for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, was based on its own need for “self-defense against North Korea’s growing nuclear and missile threats.  

THAAD Deployment in ROK to "Directly" Impair China's Security Interests: FM

Xinhua News

The deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), an advanced U.S. missile defense system, in the Republic of Korea (ROK) will "directly" impair China's security interests, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on Wednesday. "We understand the ROK's legitimate security concerns, but no country should impair others' security interests when pursuing its own," Hua Chunying said at a daily news briefing.

U.S., China Agree on Draft North Korea Sanctions Resolution at U.N.: Envoys

Louis Charbonneau and Michelle Nichols | Reuters

The United States and China have agreed on a draft resolution that would expand U.N. Security Council sanctions against North Korea over its latest nuclear test and hope to put it to a vote in the coming days, council diplomats said on Wednesday. Speaking on condition of anonymity, two council diplomats said Beijing and Washington reached a deal on the draft, which could go to the full 15-member council soon. The two veto powers had been negotiating on a draft resolution for the past seven weeks following Pyongyang's fourth nuclear test on Jan. 6.

Russia Wants Closer Look From Above the U.S.

Eric Schmitt and Michael R. Gordon | New York Times

Russia asked on Monday to fly surveillance planes equipped with high-powered digital cameras over the United States, fueling a long-simmering debate among Pentagon and intelligence officials over Russia’s intentions to use such flights to spy on American power plants, communications networks and other critical infrastructure.

Kendall: DoD to Decide Fate of Major Satellite Programs Within Months

Stew Magnuson | National Defense 

The Defense Department within a few months will choose a way forward for two major satellite programs that are vital for strategic nuclear defense: Advanced-EHF and the space-based infrared system, a senior Defense Department official said Feb. 23. Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall said in the final year of a presidential administration there are issues that are put aside for the next leaders, and others that demand decisions. 

Nuclear Liability Concern Lingers Despite India Signing Treaty

Stephen Stapczynski | Bloomberg Business

The world’s biggest nuclear technology suppliers may need more convincing that India’s liability law won’t leave them responsible for accidents. The nation earlier this month ratified an international treaty on nuclear liability, which it said “marks a conclusive step” in addressing concerns about its legislation. Westinghouse Electric Co. said India’s law still leaves technology suppliers liable for accidents, while Electricite de France SA said it’s awaiting more information from the government.

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.